C.S.Tiwana, J. - (1.) IN this revision against an interim order passed by the Sub -Divisional Magistrate, Bhiwani, dated June 26, 1975, none out of the respondents has made any appearance in spits of service. The revision has therefore, been heard ex -parte.
(2.) THE proceedings were initiated by Parkash respondent No. 2 by making a report to the police. The dispute relates to Joint agricultural land. There has been no regular partition and the different owners were said to be cultivating different portions of the land. It was found even by the Sub -Divisional Magistrate that partition proceedings between the parties were pending before the Assistant Collector First Grade, Bhiwani. In the circumstances of the present case, it was not proper for the learned Magistrate to take any action by ordering attachment. K. Janardhan Reddy v. The Vith City Magistrate Criminal Court, Hyderabad : A.I.R. 1969 AP. 150, has been cited before me by the learned counsel for the petitioner. It has been held in that case that where the property, proceedings under section 145 of the Code of Criminal Procedure cannot be initiated on the ground that one member of the family as in actual and exclusive possession of part of the family property. It has been further held that a dispute relating to joint property is not likely to cause breach of peace. Unless there is partition in the family any member who is in possession of any part of the joint family property can only be in possession on behalf of other family members. I thus set aside the order pissed by the learned Magistrate. No further proceedings under section 145 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, shall be taken in the case.;